A preprinted study by James Hansen and collaborators suggests that we've all but locked in 2°C warming by 2050. They go on to calculate a likely equilibrium warming of 10°C considering current GHG levels and known feedback loops. I know we need to take this as yet another call to action, but at the same time I think so many of us feel absolutely paralyzed by the enormity and incomprehensibility of the situation.

*In the latter case, that of rooftop solar panels, the impact is twofold: they add supply by injecting their surpluses into the grid and reduce demand when there is sunshine.*

Hello everybody! I'm a student living and studying in south Italy. As you might already know, there have been a few protests made by Ultima Generazione (Brutally translated: Last Generation) which have been object of debate and disputes (and mostly critiques) I'm afraid that Italian politicians are now exploiting these protests to indoctrinate people into hating environmentalism. In my personal experience, I've seen plenty of people who used to support environmentalist protests starting to, I wouldn't say hate, but at least distancing themselves from the environmentalist cause (regardless of the age) **Know here's the question**: Have there been similar protests in your country? What about the reaction of the media and the public? EDIT: i put a random pic of [Fridays for Future ](https://mastodon.uno/@fffitalia/110395757101828937)and Extintion Rebellion militants helping against the flood in Emilia Romagna

The “greenwashing” efforts of UK airlines may be contributing to the destruction of rainforests in Asia, openDemocracy can reveal.

As car engines are getting cleaner and tyres wider and softer, pollution from tyres is already as high as pollution from engines. But: > Levels of nitrogen oxides, byproducts of burning gasoline and diesel that cause smog, asthma and other ailments, have fallen sharply as electric vehicle ownership has risen. > But there is still a problem where the rubber meets the road. Oslo’s air has unhealthy levels of microscopic particles generated partly by the abrasion of tires and asphalt. Electric vehicles, which account for about one-third of the registered vehicles in the city but a higher proportion of traffic, may even aggravate that problem. > “They’re really a lot heavier than internal combustion engine cars, and that means that they are causing more abrasion,” said Mr. Wolf, who, like many Oslo residents, prefers to get around by bicycle.

Recycling in the US (and many Western countries, for that matter) is a sham. It always was. In reality, most of the plastic placed in recycling bins were never turned into new products. Now China has stopped taking that waste, the myth of near infinite consumption without the guilt of waste has been exposed for the lie that it always was. That's not to say that we shouldn't aim for a sustainable circular economy. Of course we should. But we'll need much bigger changes to make it happen. "For decades, we were sending the bulk of our recycling to China—tons and tons of it, sent over on ships... But last year, the country restricted imports of certain recyclables... Waste-management companies are telling [municipalities] there is no longer a market for their recycling. "These municipalities have two choices: pay much higher rates to get rid of recycling, or throw it all away. "Most are choosing the latter. "When [its kerbside recycling] program launched, Franklin [in New Hampshire] could break even on recycling by selling it for $6 a ton. Now the transfer station is charging the town $125 a ton to recycle, or $68 a ton to incinerate. "This end of recycling comes at a time when the US is creating more waste than ever. In 2015, the most recent year for which national data are available, America generated 262.4 million tons of waste, up 4.5% from 2010 and 60% from 1985." [https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/china-has-stopped-accepting-our-trash/584131/](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/china-has-stopped-accepting-our-trash/584131/) [\#Recycling](https://aus.social/tags/Recycling) [#CircularEconomy](https://aus.social/tags/CircularEconomy) [#Politics](https://aus.social/tags/Politics) [@green](https://lemmy.ml/c/green) [#ClimateChange](https://aus.social/tags/ClimateChange) [#Environment](https://aus.social/tags/Environment)

What do you think of this? I don't think that this guy is particularly trustworthy, but I think it's good when large public figures have such clear pro climate messages.

This plant caused the French company who helped building it, to go bankrupt. Gen 3 nuclear plants looks very expensive to build then. However these kind of plants do not produce any side-product which is good for producing bombs or other radioactive weapon. They have no military support then (and maybe neither government?), compared to gen 2. [https://www.wiseinternational.org/nuclear-monitor/818/french-nuclear-giant-areva-melts-down](https://www.wiseinternational.org/nuclear-monitor/818/french-nuclear-giant-areva-melts-down)

This new analysis shows that over 47 Gigatonnes of CO2 could be released by extracting and burning fossil fuels from within protected areas.

Newly-unearthed document shows the oil and gas company was warned of the “catastrophic” risks of burning its products in 1970.

What would be a great alternative or replacement to fix this problem?